>>>>> "CM" == Caolan McNamara writes:
CM> On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 04:12 -0700, Alex Lancaster wrote:
>> Caolan, do you have any best practices recommendations for the
>> naming of the openoffice.org extensions?
CM> I've no real strong feelings one way or the other, I found it
CM> convenient for e.g. writer2latex which had multiple subpackages
CM> where one of them was the openoffice.org extension to call that
CM> subpackage openoffice.org-FOO, I guess just use your own judgement
CM> here.
OK, I didn't realise that writer2latex had non-OOo components, but
that makes sense.
>> Also, will this particular extension, which is packaged as an .oxt
>> file, be able to be installed using the unopkg tool as suggested on
>> that page? i.e. are .oxt files intended to be installed using the
>> unopkg tool?
CM> Oh yes, you can just do unopkg add --shared
CM> OOoLatex-4.0.0-beta-2-linux.oxt
CM> -env:JFW_PLUGIN_DO_NOT_CHECK_ACCESSIBILITY=1
CM> or if you want to use the linking mechanism to avoid duplicating
CM> the contents of that .oxt at registration time then you can use
CM> something like
CM> %install unzip OOoLatex-4.0.0-beta-2-linux.oxt -d
CM> /usr/share/OOoLatex.uno.pkg
CM> and then have ...
CM> echo yes | unopkg add --shared --link /usr/share/OOoLatex.uno.pkg
CM> -env:JFW_PLUGIN_DO_NOT_CHECK_ACCESSIBILITY=1
CM> and
CM> unopkg remove --shared net.sourceforge.ooolatex
CM> -env:JFW_PLUGIN_DO_NOT_CHECK_ACCESSIBILITY=1
Thanks for the suggestions. Is the "net.sourceforge.ooolatex"
something you derived from the webpage, or is that somehow also in the
.oxt?
Also, in this case it appears that upstream insists on including some
binaries in the .oxt file (they don't seem to distribute a true
OS-independent source tarball)
so, for example, if you run:
unzip -l OOoLatex-4.0.0-beta-2-linux.oxt
then you get:
Length Date Time Name
-------- ---- ---- ----
931 11-03-07 09:05 AddonRegistry.xcs
1749 11-03-07 09:05 AddonRegistry.xcu
3091 10-22-07 12:17 Addons.xcu
5741 11-25-07 09:29 ChangeLogs.txt
430 11-25-07 09:38 Description.txt
754 11-28-07 13:57 description.xml
1119 11-03-07 09:00 README
1142 10-30-07 13:39 META-INF/manifest.xml
528 10-16-07 12:36 Office/UI/DrawWindowState.xcu
531 10-16-07 12:36 Office/UI/ImpressWindowState.xcu
530 10-16-07 12:36 Office/UI/WriterWindowState.xcu
2836 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexAbout.xba
7404 11-25-07 09:30 OOoLatex/OOoLatexConfig.xba
6686 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexConfig_Dlg.xba
14971 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexEquation.xba
6707 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexEquation_Dlg.xba
48258 11-28-07 13:57 OOoLatex/OOoLatexExpand.xba
6707 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexExpand_Dlg.xba
3377 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexPreamble_Dlg.xba
26656 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexSysConfig.xba
11871 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexTools.xba
2021 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexAbout_GUI.xdl
6525 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexConfig_GUI.xdl
5493 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexEquation_GUI.xdl
3539 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexExpand_GUI.xdl
729 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexInitExpand_GUI.xdl
2393 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexPreamble_GUI.xdl
5161 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/OOoLatexSysConfig_GUI.xdl
693 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/dialog.xlb
828 11-23-07 15:09 OOoLatex/script.xlb
18009 10-16-07 12:36 pkg-licence/gpl_GB.txt
21150 11-01-07 12:42 bin/Linuxi386/latex2emf
28692 11-01-07 12:43 bin/Linuxppc/latex2emf
710928 11-01-07 12:41 lib/i386/libEMF.so.1
717884 11-01-07 12:40 lib/ppc/libEMF.so.1
-------- -------
1676064 35 files
I assume the thing to do in the case is simply remove the files in
bin/ and lib/ after installing them in the %install section as you
describe above is the best way to deal with those? (libEMF is already
in Fedora, and I'd need to package latex2emf separately).
Alex
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
